That certain sections of supporters might have a grasp of the scale what happened is no plausible evidence for the earlier statement: "It's almost certain all the players and managers were aware of a tragedy at the stadium." Actually, his position "in between" (as wm422433 hinted) might have contributed to his downfall, as opposed to the ones who have played the game fully all along and walk away free. History books, especially in football, are rarely neutral and occasionally reflections of fan dynamics too (imho).
If someone in the stadium knew that something tragic had happened, even if not the full extent, it should be obvious that the players knew. Unless you can prove otherwise, it's certain Platini and the rest were aware that bad stuff had/was happening, particular since the goal came in the second half. No, Platini is not some innocent bystander caught in the crossfire of this debacle. He is a close ally of Blatter and there is no reason for him to have accepted the millions of dollars surreptitiously. Also, Platini always had the option to resign and walk away from the corruption, instead he gladly took payments and now he deservedly goes down along with the whole corrupt cabal. Good riddance.
Except that only peculiar sections of the crowd had an awareness, as opposed to the entire attendance. Those small sections can be wrong too (or have misperceptions), which is not unusual for a football crowd - in the manner a crowd (minority) typically express themselves. The burden of proof is also not on me. He isn't a close ally of Blatter in the past 12-13 years. That is well known if you vaguely follow the news. Luckily he wasn't like that as a football player as opposed to, say, rivals AS Roma who bribed themselves through Europe (most notoriously vs Dundee United in the 1984 semi final, later admitted by themselves, which is in many ways an interesting match to see back btw).
The teams were informed of what was happening even if perhaps not in full detail. Platini knew there was major trouble and should have shown better judgement in celebrating. He is close enough an ally to take $2 million in bribe money from Blatter/FIFA . And this has nothing to do with Platini as a footballer, as an executive he is very much part of the disease and it's good that he is facing punishment. One thing's for sure, he won't ever be FIFA President now.
Agree with pretty much everything. Zidane was a better dribbler, but I don't think neither of those players relied on their dribbling skills to be able to function (it's not like we're talking about Pele, Maradona, Ronaldo, Ronaldinho, Messi...) - therefore, it cannot be the decisive factor to decide this. Passing? Platini edges it. The main thing that decides this for me is Platini's clear superiority as a finisher. He was extremely effective for a player of his attributes.
That's very hard to assert. That's the same as saying Pele or Maradona wouldn't be able to play nowadays. Players from the past, if they were to be "transplanted" to today's football, they would benefit from all the things modern players benefit from. Whether they would be even better or worse is impossible to say. Let's not forget players from the past also had to deal with and overcome a lot of disadvantages working against them in order to succeed. So the proper way to compare players from different eras is comparing how dominant they were in their respective era (compared to players from their own time) and then draw parallels with players from other eras.
They are not exactly the same players, but when you compare them to other great Attacking-Midfielders (Maradona, Zico, Rivellino....), they have definitely more similarities with each other than with the other greats. As for this "not the totals on each year in the league games wich are important and denote some consistancy, but it is not a bit ridiculous to go down to consider league seasons stats and international friendlies to compare two great players" - Platini most definitely scored and led his team to some of the most important titles, just like Zidane. It would be just as innacurate dismissing Zidane by saying you cannot put him ahead of Platini simply because of his World Cup title in '98 and his performance against Brazil. There's more to it to both of them. I think it's undeniable that Platini was a superior finisher than Zidane. And that makes him edge this, I believe - it's impossible to overlook the huge difference in the amount of goals scored by two players that won similar titles and accolades and played pretty much in the same position for most of their careers.
Agree. Zidane was a better dribbler. But how exactly was he more lethal in that sense? How often was his dribbling converted to assists and goals? Otherwise, it would just be sacrificing objectiveness for showmanship (I don't mean in any way to say Zidane did this, of course). Unfortunately, I don't have the stats on their assists. But I wouldn't be surprised if Platini has more assists than Zidane as well. Which, again, makes his playmaking abilities, if not better, at least more useful and effective (and lethal) than Zidane's. In my opinion, Zidane is definitely in the Top 20 all time (maybe top 15). Platini is definitely in the top 15 (maybe top 10).
Could you maybe explain how Zidane was a better playmaker? Personally, I think Platini was a better passer than Zidane (not by such a huge margin, but still superior). Platini was also, as said, a superior finisher (and this is not by just a small margin). Their achievements are pretty similar: both named best players in the world (I believe Platini was named so 3 times as well - at least two), both led their teams and national teams to win important titles. But winning championships is also a result of your team's effort. There are plenty of great players that never won the WC and plenty of average players that did. So that cannot be the sole factor to determine individual achievements. A great deal of people only remember Zidane because of the World Cup title and the match against Brazil and nothing else - I don't think that's enough to rank him above everybody else just because of that. Besides, if you're going to talk about titles, Platini is responsible for "putting France in the football map" when he led his team to win the Euro in 1984. Some would say that was just as important to France as the WC title. I believe Platini's individual quality is greater than Zidane's: considerably more goals scored (in considerably fewer appearances) and a better passer (and playmaker).
Don't you think that the ability to score PKs and, especially, FKs should actually favour Platini on this, rather than count against him? The fact that he could take FK's better than Zidane is actually another factor that should contribute to his superiority, not the other way around. As for how many PKs Platini scored in his career, I really don't know the exact number. But even if he scored, say aroud 50 PK goals - he would still have about 100 goals on Zidane, in fewer appearances (somewhere between 130 and 160 fewer games played by Platini, if I'm not wrong). It's a big number. As for Platini playing as a Forward, I'm afraid I don't know much about it. I've always looked at him as an Attacking-Midfielder. If Zidane did not get in the position of scoring as many goals, then he should be, at least, assisting more or just as much as Platini - otherwise, what would he be doing on the pitch then? As a playmaker and AM, that's the least Zidane should do. If Platini passed better, assisted more, and scored more goals - then the obvious conclusion is that Platini is the greater player. I think a lot of people look at Zidane for his class and elegance, but actually forget to look at what he actually produced on the pitch. Again, I'm not implying he wasn't a great player (as I said many times) or was not objective - but maybe people should actually take into account what his actual contribution for the team was (in other words: goal opportunities, assists, goals..), rather than only looking at how elegantly he played.
I am not sure if you missed the part, but let me repeat what I stated earlier. Zidane in 4 seasons with Bordeaux had approximately the same number of FK goals as did Platini in his 4 seasons with Juventus. This lends one to believe that Zidane not getting more FK goals was down to factors other than any perceived inferiority in his skill at taking them. I would tend to disagree on the last statement since it lacks context and since if we go by it, Lampard would be a greater player as well. Regarding PK goals and playing as a forward (and FK goals as well), all of these IMHO are the aspects of Platini's game which provide the context relevant to explaining Zidane's relatively mediocre goal stats. Sure, I agree with you here. Since I am quite well versed about these aspects of Zidane i.e. more so than most other people out there, let me explain that he contributed a lot more in terms of goal opportunities, assists, goals, etc. than people give him credit for and in some cases a lot more than his peers who were considered to be more consistent than him as well (obviously, applying standards of a different era to judge him is not a mistake that I am willing to make). Since there is an exact same lobby of people but in the opposite party (detractors), who look to use his elegance as a stick to beat him with, I think that any benefit he gets out of his elegant style cancels itself out quite well in the long run as well.
It's hard to explain well cause I'm not good using English, so excuse me. First, I don't think assist is only factor to prove good passer, it just one of criterion. For example, Kevin de Bruyne had tons of assist last season, but I think he is not best passer cause of his poor accuracy. I can't explain my sense of football, anyway I think Zidane is better passer. Second, I prefer status to rank footballers, neither class nor talent. Beacause there is really tiny gap between legendary players, nobody can assess their true quality. How can make unanimous greatest footballer ranking? I know title is affected by 'luck', but I think achievement is important factor.
I agree with what you are saying. At club level, Platini is definitely superior to Zidane. The reason Zidane has received so much recognition as a top footballer is at the NT level. take his 3 summers of his whole career away (WC 98, Euro 2000, WC 2006) and what do you have and how much does that affect his status.
That may be true but why should we take away the international tournaments? They are expected to be a huge part of a player's legacy.
That's what you seem to not understand. Beyond the considerations about how much goals or assists they have made it remains that, although they played from approximatively the same position on the pitch/ within their team, here are two different players.
Two great (but different) players. I think Platini is the better playmaker and possibly even a level ahead as a passer. The range, the weight, backspin, first time accurate passes. The complete playmaker.
ooh, its close. I think Zizou is better, only just. Because of his better dribbling, skills and shooting. But Platini is much better at passing making him a sublime playmaker
This seems to be the most comprehensive compilation on Michel platini available on YouTube. It is over 20mins in length actually has a lot of rare footage from his St Ettiene days Platini turnt 60 yard accurate long balls out of fashion.i don’t think I’ve seen anything like it certainly not with the same regularity From recent times maybe only scholes,prime Fabregas for Arsenal or even Xabi Alonso in his deep Lying player role for Liverpool had this kind of passing range (50-60 yards) I think maradona attempted long balls from absurdly long distances but I don’t think his conversion rate was in the same ball park as these players Andrea pirlo is another one in his juventus days as a deep lying playmaker(even before this time in brescia the ability was there as we saw from his famous assist on Roberto baggio -ironically against juventus) I
They're totality different players tbh Platini is in my top ten ever but I'll always have Zidane at the very top